SEN. Panfilo Lacson on Thursday renewed his call to abolish the “leadership fund” mechanism from the national budget, branding it a “worse version of the outlawed pork barrel system.” Lacson said the leadership fund provided lawmakers an opportunity to make insertions even during the preparation stage of the national budget.
“The leadership fund is not only a descendant of the outlawed ‘pork barrel’ but also its worst version,” Lacson said.
He pointed out that congressmen already have appropriate channels through local or regional development councils to elevate infrastructure needs. Bypassing local councils through prearranged allocations risks compromising true regional priorities, he said.
“Why would members of Congress dip their hands in the budget preparation phase outside of the local development councils preparation of their local development plans where they are allowed to represent their districts?” he said.
Lacson issued his call to permanently prohibit the “leadership fund” mechanism a day after former Public Works secretary Manuel Bonoan told the Sandiganbayan that all senators had at least P500 million of allocations for their priority projects in “leadership funds” earmarked under the Department of Public Works and Highways’ (DPWH) budget for 2025.
Bonoan said a total of P24 billion was allotted for senators, but the amount for each lawmaker was supposedly subject to the discretion of then-Senate president Juan Miguel Zubiri.
Zubiri denied this, saying he “never requested, held or handled any list of project requests from senators.” Lacson said the testimony of Bonoan, as well as recent developments on anomalous flood control projects, highlighted how the “leadership fund” created an additional avenue for lawmakers to insert projects even before the proposed budget reaches Congress.
“The leadership fund, aka ‘allocables,’ is a worse version of the outlawed pork barrel system. It added another layer that provided legislators opportunity to make budget insertions even during the preparation phase of the national budget, or before the National Expenditure Program (NEP) is transmitted to the Congress for deliberations by both chamber, where further insertions could still be introduced,” said Lacson, who has consistently rejected pork barrel in all its forms.
“With all that said, I maintain that such [an] anomaly in the passage of the national budget must stop,” he added.
The “leadership fund” was first exposed in September last year when Bonoan mentioned it during a Senate Blue Ribbon hearing on the flood control bribery scandal chaired by Lacson.
At the time, Bonoan, replying to Lacson’s query on how legislators inserted projects into the budget proposal that had not yet entered the legislative phase, said the DPWH consolidated lawmakers’ requested proposals into the NEP, including through the “leadership fund” in the Senate.
Bonoan said the proposals were vetted with the DPWH’s planning service so the projects being included “are consistent with development programs.” He also said the insertions were allowed at the NEP stage to avoid complications during the bicameral conference committee, prompting Lacson to remind him that “the role of lawmakers is in the authorization phase,” or when the budget bill is submitted to Congress for deliberation.
Lacson said the “leadership fund” helps explain how the public learned of individual allocations amounting to billions of pesos for legislators — including P6.79 billion for former Senate president Alan Peter Cayetano and P4.7 billion for Sen. Pia Cayetano in Taguig City, from the 2025 General Appropriations Act.
He said such individual allocations in Taguig City — one local government unit with two legislative districts — led to “illegal reclamation disguised as slope protection and flood mitigation projects, now the subject of an investigation by the Ombudsman and forfeiture proceedings by the Philippine Reclamation Authority.” Lacson also pointed out that his call for the abolition of the “leadership fund” threatened Sen. Vicente Sotto III’s Senate presidency due to internal politics.
“My call for its abolition after exposing the leadership fund threatened then-SP Sotto’s Senate presidency,” Lacson said.
A Senate president maintains the majority bloc through institutional patronage, equitable project distribution and committee allocations. Removing the leadership fund would eliminate a key mechanism used by Senate leadership to keep colleagues satisfied and unified. Because senators felt their project allocations were being endangered by the investigation, members of the majority bloc threatened to bolt or reorganize the Senate leadership.
“While insertions per se do not automatically translate to misuse of public funds, it could open the floodgates of abuse and misuse of public funds for some corrupt politicians,” Lacson said.
Palace assurance
The Palace on Thursday said there are no “leadership funds” for senators in the proposed P7.2-trillion proposed 2027 national budget as President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. has been “very cautious” not repeating past mistakes.
Presidential Communications Office Undersecretary Claire Castro said this when sought for comment on the testimony of Bonoan that in the previous Congress, all senators availed themselves of at least P500 million each from the department’s leadership fund to accommodate their pet projects.
Castro said that the president, Public Works Secretary Vince Dizon and Budget Secretary Kim Robert de Leon have been very careful in preparing the 2027 National Expenditure Program given the controversy that hounded the 2026 budget.
All projects proposed in the 2027 DPWH budget are based on needs of the local and regional government, Castro said.
